Has Harvard turned a corner?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More kids will be picking their other admits, like Princeton, MIT, Stanford, etc over the H.

Ha, you wish! As if students are being accepted to multiple Ivies.

My kid decided between Harvard, Stanford, and MIT admits. So yes, this is a thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More kids will be picking their other admits, like Princeton, MIT, Stanford, etc over the H.

Ha, you wish! As if students are being accepted to multiple Ivies.

My kid decided between Harvard, Stanford, and MIT admits. So yes, this is a thing.

Congrats to your kid. What is their pick?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More kids will be picking their other admits, like Princeton, MIT, Stanford, etc over the H.

Ha, you wish! As if students are being accepted to multiple Ivies.

My kid decided between Harvard, Stanford, and MIT admits. So yes, this is a thing.

Congrats to your kid. What is their pick?

They went to Harvard but their decision might be different now. There is nothing magic there that doesn't exist elsewhere. It can be hard to pass on Harvard though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Harvard is now the Bud Light of the Ivy League. It will continue to exist as a brand but it has alienated its customer base (alumni) who can and have taken their money elsewhere. It will be a slow decline but eventually they will reach the point where they will be the safety Ivy. Yes, the strivers will still apply in great numbers and embrace the woke ethos that will remain entrenched for a generation or two.

I wish people understood that alumni are often the WEAKEST part of the community. They think they’re the “customer base” which, lol. And they think their money matters. The endowments investments are what matters. Not your $50-5k a year. I’m sure they’re wondering if even the handful of big donors are worth their trouble.

The alumni isn’t that impressive. They couldn’t get in today. They often got in because their own parents got in. It’s not just Harvard. Even places like MIT have an alumni base that can’t hold a candle to their current students. Which is why MIT doesn’t consider legacy and no MIT grads think of themselves as the customer base.

Listen, if you want to give to your old school, do it. But do it as a way of paying back for what was already given to you. This is not a down payment on what they can do for you down the road. That transactional bullshit is what looks as bad as wokism - you just don’t see it in yourself

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For Jewish families with super bright kids, the Harvard name will still trump any concern about anti-Semitism.

Jewish enrollment at Harvard (and other Ivies) is down quite a bit in the past few years, so either this is false or the anti-Semitism now extends to the admissions office.

It used to be that the winners of math, science, and music--as well as various other academic--competitions were mostly Jewish. Now those winners are overwhelmingly Asian. I think the Jews have in large part become so successful in this country that fewer parents are pushing their kids to achieve at the level that it usually takes to qualify for admission to Harvard, and their kids do not feel the pressure to achieve that previous generations experienced.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For Jewish families with super bright kids, the Harvard name will still trump any concern about anti-Semitism.

Jewish enrollment at Harvard (and other Ivies) is down quite a bit in the past few years, so either this is false or the anti-Semitism now extends to the admissions office.

Jewish people like everyone else are free to go wherever they want. I’m not sure what the big deal is

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvard is now the Bud Light of the Ivy League. It will continue to exist as a brand but it has alienated its customer base (alumni) who can and have taken their money elsewhere. It will be a slow decline but eventually they will reach the point where they will be the safety Ivy. Yes, the strivers will still apply in great numbers and embrace the woke ethos that will remain entrenched for a generation or two.

I wish people understood that alumni are often the WEAKEST part of the community. They think they’re the “customer base” which, lol. And they think their money matters. The endowments investments are what matters. Not your $50-5k a year. I’m sure they’re wondering if even the handful of big donors are worth their trouble.

The alumni isn’t that impressive. They couldn’t get in today. They often got in because their own parents got in. It’s not just Harvard. Even places like MIT have an alumni base that can’t hold a candle to their current students. Which is why MIT doesn’t consider legacy and no MIT grads think of themselves as the customer base.

Listen, if you want to give to your old school, do it. But do it as a way of paying back for what was already given to you. This is not a down payment on what they can do for you down the road. That transactional bullshit is what looks as bad as wokism - you just don’t see it in yourself

Which alumni (or alumni by admission who are donors even though the dropped out)…you mean like literally the richest people in the world like Gates, Zuckerberg, Griffin, Ballmer, and thousands of others?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvard is now the Bud Light of the Ivy League. It will continue to exist as a brand but it has alienated its customer base (alumni) who can and have taken their money elsewhere. It will be a slow decline but eventually they will reach the point where they will be the safety Ivy. Yes, the strivers will still apply in great numbers and embrace the woke ethos that will remain entrenched for a generation or two.

I wish people understood that alumni are often the WEAKEST part of the community. They think they’re the “customer base” which, lol. And they think their money matters. The endowments investments are what matters. Not your $50-5k a year. I’m sure they’re wondering if even the handful of big donors are worth their trouble.

The alumni isn’t that impressive. They couldn’t get in today. They often got in because their own parents got in. It’s not just Harvard. Even places like MIT have an alumni base that can’t hold a candle to their current students. Which is why MIT doesn’t consider legacy and no MIT grads think of themselves as the customer base.

Listen, if you want to give to your old school, do it. But do it as a way of paying back for what was already given to you. This is not a down payment on what they can do for you down the road. That transactional bullshit is what looks as bad as wokism - you just don’t see it in yourself

I'm probably more pro Palestine than anyone on this board but this comes off as so offputting and entitled I can't even. Thank God this is the take of one lone nut on the Internet and not anyone in the admin??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For Jewish families with super bright kids, the Harvard name will still trump any concern about anti-Semitism.

Jewish enrollment at Harvard (and other Ivies) is down quite a bit in the past few years, so either this is false or the anti-Semitism now extends to the admissions office.

It used to be that the winners of math, science, and music--as well as various other academic--competitions were mostly Jewish. Now those winners are overwhelmingly Asian. I think the Jews have in large part become so successful in this country that fewer parents are pushing their kids to achieve at the level that it usually takes to qualify for admission to Harvard, and their kids do not feel the pressure to achieve that previous generations experienced.

It’s this…and even 2nd and 3rd generation Asian kids are following the same path.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvard is now the Bud Light of the Ivy League. It will continue to exist as a brand but it has alienated its customer base (alumni) who can and have taken their money elsewhere. It will be a slow decline but eventually they will reach the point where they will be the safety Ivy. Yes, the strivers will still apply in great numbers and embrace the woke ethos that will remain entrenched for a generation or two.

I wish people understood that alumni are often the WEAKEST part of the community. They think they’re the “customer base” which, lol. And they think their money matters. The endowments investments are what matters. Not your $50-5k a year. I’m sure they’re wondering if even the handful of big donors are worth their trouble.

The alumni isn’t that impressive. They couldn’t get in today. They often got in because their own parents got in. It’s not just Harvard. Even places like MIT have an alumni base that can’t hold a candle to their current students. Which is why MIT doesn’t consider legacy and no MIT grads think of themselves as the customer base.

Listen, if you want to give to your old school, do it. But do it as a way of paying back for what was already given to you. This is not a down payment on what they can do for you down the road. That transactional bullshit is what looks as bad as wokism - you just don’t see it in yourself

Claudine Gay, welcome to DCUM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvard is now the Bud Light of the Ivy League. It will continue to exist as a brand but it has alienated its customer base (alumni) who can and have taken their money elsewhere. It will be a slow decline but eventually they will reach the point where they will be the safety Ivy. Yes, the strivers will still apply in great numbers and embrace the woke ethos that will remain entrenched for a generation or two.

I wish people understood that alumni are often the WEAKEST part of the community. They think they’re the “customer base” which, lol. And they think their money matters. The endowments investments are what matters. Not your $50-5k a year. I’m sure they’re wondering if even the handful of big donors are worth their trouble.

The alumni isn’t that impressive. They couldn’t get in today. They often got in because their own parents got in. It’s not just Harvard. Even places like MIT have an alumni base that can’t hold a candle to their current students. Which is why MIT doesn’t consider legacy and no MIT grads think of themselves as the customer base.

Listen, if you want to give to your old school, do it. But do it as a way of paying back for what was already given to you. This is not a down payment on what they can do for you down the road. That transactional bullshit is what looks as bad as wokism - you just don’t see it in yourself

Which alumni (or alumni by admission who are donors even though the dropped out)…you mean like literally the richest people in the world like Gates, Zuckerberg, Griffin, Ballmer, and thousands of others?

eh, look at top 100. you're not on this list anyway so the idea that you, the customer base, is pissed off is ridiculous.


https://www.forbes.com/billionaires/

[Anonymous]

Alumni giving is an important source of income. If people really wanted to take away funding, they would find a way to cut off government funding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvard is now the Bud Light of the Ivy League. It will continue to exist as a brand but it has alienated its customer base (alumni) who can and have taken their money elsewhere. It will be a slow decline but eventually they will reach the point where they will be the safety Ivy. Yes, the strivers will still apply in great numbers and embrace the woke ethos that will remain entrenched for a generation or two.

I wish people understood that alumni are often the WEAKEST part of the community. They think they’re the “customer base” which, lol. And they think their money matters. The endowments investments are what matters. Not your $50-5k a year. I’m sure they’re wondering if even the handful of big donors are worth their trouble.

The alumni isn’t that impressive. They couldn’t get in today. They often got in because their own parents got in. It’s not just Harvard. Even places like MIT have an alumni base that can’t hold a candle to their current students. Which is why MIT doesn’t consider legacy and no MIT grads think of themselves as the customer base.

Listen, if you want to give to your old school, do it. But do it as a way of paying back for what was already given to you. This is not a down payment on what they can do for you down the road. That transactional bullshit is what looks as bad as wokism - you just don’t see it in yourself

But it should be. There should be legacy 50-75% of each class.

[Anonymous]

Current students are not clearly better at most top places than alumni in their 30s and early 40s (there are exceptions, with Chicago being a big one).
Beyond qualification thresholds, it is in a school's best interest to admit legacy kids (community over time, donors across generations and in estates (more important now than ever), fewer alumni relations headaches). They key is to keep a competitive threshold, which many haven't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is mostly a "corner" engineered by right wing politicians in en election year. Harvard is fine and will continue to lead in discovering knowledge and seeking truth.

+1